DOCSLIB.ORG

The Reaction of the City of London to the Quebec Resolutions, 1864-1866 Andrew Smith

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Reaction of the City of London to the Quebec Resolutions, 1864-1866 Andrew Smith Document generated on 10/02/2021 2:48 a.m. Journal of the Canadian Historical Association Revue de la Société historique du Canada The Reaction of the City of London to the Quebec Resolutions, 1864-1866 Andrew Smith Volume 17, Number 1, 2006 Article abstract This paper examines how British investors reacted when the Quebec URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/016100ar Resolutions were published in the fall of 1864. Although the responses of bond DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/016100ar markets are briefly considered, the paper is mainly based on non-quantitative sources such as newspaper editorials and correspondence. Examining why See table of contents British investors generally approved of the constitutional plan contained in the Quebec Resolutions is useful because it illuminates such important themes as the place of imported capital in Canadian state formation, the role of Britain in Publisher(s) Confederation, and the viability of interest-group explanations for the making of colonial policy. The ideas of British investors are also important because The Canadian Historical Association/La Société historique du Canada British capital helped to finance the public works that were a sine qua non of Confederation. In 1866, Joseph Howe identified pressure from the bondholders ISSN of unprofitable Canadian railways as one of the major factors driving the British government’s support of Confederation. Although Tom Naylor and 0847-4478 (print) other historians have made use of Howe’s insight, the role of the investors has 1712-6274 (digital) been ignored by both Ged Martin and by those scholars who advance an ideological-origins explanation of Confederation. This paper will help remedy Explore this journal this oversight and is a step towards a viable materialist interpretation of why Confederation happened in the 1860s. Cite this article Smith, A. (2006). The Reaction of the City of London to the Quebec Resolutions, 1864-1866. Journal of the Canadian Historical Association / Revue de la Société historique du Canada, 17(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.7202/016100ar Tous droits réservés © The Canadian Historical Association/La Société This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit historique du Canada, 2007 (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/ This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit. Érudit is a non-profit inter-university consortium of the Université de Montréal, Université Laval, and the Université du Québec à Montréal. Its mission is to promote and disseminate research. https://www.erudit.org/en/ The Reaction of the City of London to the Quebec Resolutions, 1864-1866 ANDREW SMITH Abstract This paper examines how British investors reacted when the Quebec Resolutions were published in the fall of 1864. Although the responses of bond markets are briefly considered, the paper is mainly based on non-quantitative sources such as newspaper editorials and correspondence. Examining why British inves- tors generally approved of the constitutional plan contained in the Quebec Resolutions is useful because it illuminates such important themes as the place of imported capital in Canadian state formation, the role of Britain in Confederation, and the viability of interest-group explanations for the making of colonial policy. The ideas of British investors are also important because British capital helped to finance the public works that were a sine qua non of Confederation. In 1866, Joseph Howe identified pressure from the bondhold- ers of unprofitable Canadian railways as one of the major factors driving the British government’s support of Confederation. Although Tom Naylor and other historians have made use of Howe’s insight, the role of the investors has been ignored by both Ged Martin and by those scholars who advance an ideological-origins explanation of Confederation. This paper will help remedy this oversight and is a step towards a viable materialist interpretation of why Confederation happened in the 1860s. Résumé Cet article examine comment les investisseurs britanniques ont réagi au moment de la publication des résolutions de la Conférence de Québec à l’automne de 1864. Les réactions des marchés des obligations sont considérées brièvement, mais le texte se base principalement sur des sources non quanti- tatives telles que les éditoriaux des journaux et la correspondance. L’étude des raisons qui amènent les investisseurs britanniques à approuver, de façon générale, le plan constitutionnel compris dans les résolutions s’avère utile. En effet, elle fait la lumière sur des thèmes importants comme la place des capitaux étrangers dans la création de l’État canadien, le rôle de la Grande-Bretagne dans la Confédération et la viabilité des arguments des groupes d’intérêt en ce JOURNAL OF THE CHA 2006 REVUE DE LA SHC New Series, Vol. 17, no. 1/Nouvelle série, vol. 17, no 1 1 JOURNAL OF THE CHA 2006 REVUE DE LA SHC qui a trait à l’élaboration d’une politique coloniale. L’opinion des investisseurs britanniques revêt aussi son importance, car les capitaux britanniques aident à financer des travaux publics, condition indispensable à la Confédération. En 1866, Joseph Howe observe que la pression exercée par les détenteurs d’obligations déficitaires de chemins de fer canadiens constitue une des prin- cipales causes de l’appui du gouvernement britannique à la Confédération. Même si Tom Naylor et d’autres historiens ont tiré profit des éclaircissements de Howe, Ged Martin, de même que les universitaires qui prônent la thèse des origines idéologiques de la Confédération, ont ignoré le rôle des investisseurs. Cet article aide à remédier à cet oubli et représente un pas vers une interpré- tation matérialiste viable de l’avènement de la Confédération dans les années 1960. oney may not make the world go around, but investment had a great Mdeal to do with Confederation. This paper examines how British inves- tors reacted when a draft constitution for a British North American federation appeared in November 1864 in the form of the Quebec Resolutions. Although the responses of bond markets are briefly considered, this paper is mainly based on non-quantitative sources: fluctuations in the yields on colonial government bonds suggest that investors had a preference for colonial federa- tion, but understanding why investors thought Confederation was a good idea involves looking at the interpretations of the Resolutions that appeared in their correspondence and in the British business press. These sources suggest that the investors supported Confederation because they believed it would facilitate particular types of state intervention in the economy. Moreover, they sensed that the creation of a larger political unit would limit the influence of mass opinion in colonial law-making and would thereby prevent the state from inter- fering with the market in the “wrong” way. Since opponents of Confederation frequently characterized British financiers as the driving force behind the scheme, we ought to ascertain the actual opinions and actions of the investors, a group whose role in Confederation is ignored by most historians. In explain- ing why some interest groups in Britain supported Confederation while others were opposed to key planks of the Confederation settlement, this paper will shed new light on the relationship between Britain and its North American colonies in the 1860s. The academic literature on Canadian Confederation is rich, varied, and often politically charged. The ideas of the Fathers of Confederation regard- ing provincial powers are an important focus of scholarly debate, and Paul Romney’s reminder that John A. Macdonald’s centralizing aspirations were not shared by all of the English-speaking Fathers appears particularly relevant to 2 THE REACTION OF THE CITY OF LONDON TO THE QUEBEC RESOLUTIONS, 1864-1866 contemporary politics.1 Several intellectual historians have recently explored the deeper ideological aspects of Confederation: Ian McKay’s liberal-order thesis provides a particularly important framework for interpreting the creation of the Dominion.2 The place of French Canada in Confederation has generated its own set of scholarly debates, as have the experiences of Nova Scotia and the Maritimes as a whole.3 The fact that our analysis of Confederation is now being extended to include other segments of Canadian society, most notably women, is an indication that historians of nation-building in Canada are begin- ning to draw on the findings of social historians in looking at Confederation’s many facets.4 The history of trans-Atlantic investment provides yet another lens for viewing Confederation. The reactions of British investors to the constitu- tional blueprint contained in the Quebec Resolutions is worthy of study because their ideas illuminate important themes, such as the place of imported capital in Canadian state formation and the role of Britain in Confederation.5 1 Alan C. Cairns, “The Judicial Committee and its Critics,” Canadian Journal of Political Science 4 (1971): 301-45. For the evolution of Canadian federalism after 1867, see Garth Stevenson, Ex Uno Plures: Federal Provincial Relations in Canada, 1867-1896 (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1993), 3-22; Paul Romney, Getting it Wrong: How Canadians Forgot their Past and Imperilled Confederation (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), 75-108. 2 Peter J. Smith, “The Ideological Origins of Canadian Confederation,”
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evidence from the British Empire - Guo Xu Online Appendix
    34 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW MONTH YEAR The Costs of Patronage: Evidence from the British Empire - Guo Xu Online Appendix Figure A1. Sample of comparative revenue statement for Fiji 1854 (Blue Book) Note: Sample of comparative revenue statement for Fiji 1854 from the Blue Book. Each row records the revenue for a specific source (e.g. customs revenue). The two columns report the revenue in the current (1854) and the previous year (1853). VOL. VOL NO. ISSUE THE COSTS OF PATRONAGE 35 Figure A2. Distribution of degrees of separation and cut-off .15 .1 Density .05 0 5 15 25 35 45 55 Degrees of separation Dark grey = Observed ties; Light grey = Randomly drawn Note: Dark grey is the distribution of observed degrees of separation in the Colonial Office, light grey is the distribution for randomly drawn pairs from the population of the Peerage dataset. Vertical line marks the 16 degrees of separation cut-off. Figure A3. Size of switcher sample and cut-off for shared ancestry 80 60 40 20 Number of governors/terms 0 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Degrees of blood separation Within-governor shocks Within-term Note: Number of governors/governor-colony spells that experience a within-shock to connections as a function of the cut-off for connectedness 36 THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW MONTH YEAR Figure A4. Retirement by connectedness - Survival estimates 1.00 0.75 0.50 Survival probability 0.25 p-value connected=unconnected: 0.15 0.00 0 5 10 15 20 Years served as governor Unconnected Connected Note: Kaplan-Meier survival estimates.
    [Show full text]
  • JOHN A. MACDONALD the Indispensable Politician
    JOHN A. MACDONALD The Indispensable Politician by Alastair C.F. Gillespie With a Foreword by the Hon. Peter MacKay Board of Directors CHAIR Brian Flemming Rob Wildeboer International lawyer, writer, and policy advisor, Halifax Executive Chairman, Martinrea International Inc., Robert Fulford Vaughan Former Editor of Saturday Night magazine, columnist VICE CHAIR with the National Post, Ottawa Jacquelyn Thayer Scott Wayne Gudbranson Past President and Professor, CEO, Branham Group Inc., Ottawa Cape Breton University, Sydney Stanley Hartt MANAGING DIRECTOR Counsel, Norton Rose Fulbright LLP, Toronto Brian Lee Crowley, Ottawa Calvin Helin SECRETARY Aboriginal author and entrepreneur, Vancouver Lincoln Caylor Partner, Bennett Jones LLP, Toronto Peter John Nicholson Inaugural President, Council of Canadian Academies, TREASURER Annapolis Royal Martin MacKinnon CFO, Black Bull Resources Inc., Halifax Hon. Jim Peterson Former federal cabinet minister, Counsel at Fasken DIRECTORS Martineau, Toronto Pierre Casgrain Director and Corporate Secretary of Casgrain Maurice B. Tobin & Company Limited, Montreal The Tobin Foundation, Washington DC Erin Chutter Executive Chair, Global Energy Metals Corporation, Vancouver Research Advisory Board Laura Jones Janet Ajzenstat, Executive Vice-President of the Canadian Federation Professor Emeritus of Politics, McMaster University of Independent Business, Vancouver Brian Ferguson, Vaughn MacLellan Professor, Health Care Economics, University of Guelph DLA Piper (Canada) LLP, Toronto Jack Granatstein, Historian and former head of the Canadian War Museum Advisory Council Patrick James, Dornsife Dean’s Professor, University of Southern John Beck California President and CEO, Aecon Enterprises Inc., Toronto Rainer Knopff, Navjeet (Bob) Dhillon Professor Emeritus of Politics, University of Calgary President and CEO, Mainstreet Equity Corp., Calgary Larry Martin, Jim Dinning Prinicipal, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontario: the Centre of Confederation?
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository University of Calgary Press University of Calgary Press Open Access Books 2018-10 Reconsidering Confederation: Canada's Founding Debates, 1864-1999 University of Calgary Press Heidt, D. (Ed.). (2018). "Reconsidering Confederation: Canada's Founding Debates, 1864-1999". Calgary, AB: University of Calgary Press. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/108896 book https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 International Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca RECONSIDERING CONFEDERATION: Canada’s Founding Debates, 1864–1999 Edited by Daniel Heidt ISBN 978-1-77385-016-0 THIS BOOK IS AN OPEN ACCESS E-BOOK. It is an electronic version of a book that can be purchased in physical form through any bookseller or on-line retailer, or from our distributors. Please support this open access publication by requesting that your university purchase a print copy of this book, or by purchasing a copy yourself. If you have any questions, please contact us at [email protected] Cover Art: The artwork on the cover of this book is not open access and falls under traditional copyright provisions; it cannot be reproduced in any way without written permission of the artists and their agents. The cover can be displayed as a complete cover image for the purposes of publicizing this work, but the artwork cannot be extracted from the context of the cover of this specific work without breaching the artist’s copyright. COPYRIGHT NOTICE: This open-access work is published under a Creative Commons licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Translating the Constitution Act, 1867
    TRANSLATING THE CONSTITUTION ACT, 1867 A Legal-Historical Perspective by HUGO YVON DENIS CHOQUETTE A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Law in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada September 2009 Copyright © Hugo Yvon Denis Choquette, 2009 Abstract Twenty-seven years after the adoption of the Constitution Act, 1982, the Constitution of Canada is still not officially bilingual in its entirety. A new translation of the unilingual Eng- lish texts was presented to the federal government by the Minister of Justice nearly twenty years ago, in 1990. These new French versions are the fruits of the labour of the French Constitutional Drafting Committee, which had been entrusted by the Minister with the translation of the texts listed in the Schedule to the Constitution Act, 1982 which are official in English only. These versions were never formally adopted. Among these new translations is that of the founding text of the Canadian federation, the Constitution Act, 1867. A look at this translation shows that the Committee chose to de- part from the textual tradition represented by the previous French versions of this text. In- deed, the Committee largely privileged the drafting of a text with a modern, clear, and con- cise style over faithfulness to the previous translations or even to the source text. This translation choice has important consequences. The text produced by the Commit- tee is open to two criticisms which a greater respect for the prior versions could have avoided. First, the new French text cannot claim the historical legitimacy of the English text, given their all-too-dissimilar origins.
    [Show full text]
  • GEORGE BROWN the Reformer
    GEORGE BROWN The Reformer by Alastair C.F. Gillespie With a Foreword by the Hon. Preston Manning Board of Directors Richard Fadden Former National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister and former Deputy Minister of National Defence CHAIR Rob Wildeboer Brian Flemming Executive Chairman, Martinrea International Inc. International lawyer, writer, and policy advisor Robert Fulford VICE CHAIR Former Editor of Saturday Night magazine, columnist with Jacquelyn Thayer Scott the National Post Past President and Professor, Wayne Gudbranson Cape Breton University, Sydney CEO, Branham Group Inc., Ottawa MANAGING DIRECTOR Stanley Hartt Brian Lee Crowley Counsel, Norton Rose LLP SECRETARY Calvin Helin Lincoln Caylor International speaker, best-selling author, entrepreneur Partner, Bennett Jones LLP, Toronto and lawyer. TREASURER Peter John Nicholson Martin MacKinnon Former President, Canadian Council of Academies, Ottawa CFO, Black Bull Resources Inc., Halifax Hon. Jim Peterson Former federal cabinet minister, Counsel at Fasken DIRECTORS Martineau, Toronto Pierre Casgrain Maurice B. Tobin Director and Corporate Secretary of Casgrain the Tobin Foundation, Washington DC & Company Limited Erin Chutter President and CEO of Global Cobalt Corporation Research Advisory Board Laura Jones Janet Ajzenstat Executive Vice-President of the Canadian Federation Professor Emeritus of Politics, McMaster University of Independent Business (CFIB). Brian Ferguson Vaughn MacLellan Professor, Health Care Economics, University of Guelph DLA Piper (Canada) LLP Jack Granatstein Historian and former head of the Canadian War Museum Advisory Council Patrick James Professor, University of Southern California John Beck Rainer Knopff Chairman and CEO, Aecon Construction Ltd., Toronto Professor of Politics, University of Calgary Navjeet (Bob) Dhillon Larry Martin President and CEO, Mainstreet Equity Corp., Calgary Principal, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Country Coding Units
    INSTITUTE Country Coding Units v11.1 - March 2021 Copyright © University of Gothenburg, V-Dem Institute All rights reserved Suggested citation: Coppedge, Michael, John Gerring, Carl Henrik Knutsen, Staffan I. Lindberg, Jan Teorell, and Lisa Gastaldi. 2021. ”V-Dem Country Coding Units v11.1” Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Funders: We are very grateful for our funders’ support over the years, which has made this ven- ture possible. To learn more about our funders, please visit: https://www.v-dem.net/en/about/ funders/ For questions: [email protected] 1 Contents Suggested citation: . .1 1 Notes 7 1.1 ”Country” . .7 2 Africa 9 2.1 Central Africa . .9 2.1.1 Cameroon (108) . .9 2.1.2 Central African Republic (71) . .9 2.1.3 Chad (109) . .9 2.1.4 Democratic Republic of the Congo (111) . .9 2.1.5 Equatorial Guinea (160) . .9 2.1.6 Gabon (116) . .9 2.1.7 Republic of the Congo (112) . 10 2.1.8 Sao Tome and Principe (196) . 10 2.2 East/Horn of Africa . 10 2.2.1 Burundi (69) . 10 2.2.2 Comoros (153) . 10 2.2.3 Djibouti (113) . 10 2.2.4 Eritrea (115) . 10 2.2.5 Ethiopia (38) . 10 2.2.6 Kenya (40) . 11 2.2.7 Malawi (87) . 11 2.2.8 Mauritius (180) . 11 2.2.9 Rwanda (129) . 11 2.2.10 Seychelles (199) . 11 2.2.11 Somalia (130) . 11 2.2.12 Somaliland (139) . 11 2.2.13 South Sudan (32) . 11 2.2.14 Sudan (33) .
    [Show full text]
  • The Crown and the Confederation
    I THE CROWN AND THE CONFEDERATION. I . --... +-+-+~.. - T EE LETTE S TO THE HON. JOHN .ALEXANDER McDONALD, BY A BAOKWOODSMAN. Finis Coronat? ~tonfrtttI : JOHN LOVELL, PRINTER, ST. NICHOLAS STREET. 1864. ... The first and second of the followin g Letters are reprinted with a few verbal alterations from the Montreul Gaeette , the th ird nppears III print, for the first time, in th ese pages, .- THE CR,OvVNAND THE CON~1EDERATION. LETTER I. The fVriler introduces h.imself-State of opinion among his neighbors at JJiapleton- Conjusion of ideas as to the term Confederation-Monarchical Confederacies, ancient and modern-Lord Bacon's opinion that Monarchy is founded in the Natural Law - Monarchical elements in British Jimerican population-.J1nalysis thereof: The French Canadian. element­ " Old Country" element-the descendants of U. E. L oya.lists-The Con- federacv ought to embrace "the three estates." MAPLETON, C. E., Sept. sui, 1864. RESPECTED SIR,-In the ministerial explanations which you gave last June, in your place in Parliament, as to the occasion of that crisis, you were reported to have said that a settlement was to be sought for our constitutional perplexities, " in the well understood principles of Confederation." You will, I am assured from all that is reported of your character, excuse a plain man, wholly out of politics himself (except in so far as every subject of the Queen and spectator of events Inay be said to be interested), for addressing you a few words of commentary on your own text. In justice to what may seem crude or impractical in my style or opinions, I may be permitted to introduce myself as one who has formerly had a good deal of commerce with the world; which lay, howeve~, more with the past generation than the present; whose notions may therefore be open to the imputation of old-fash- 6 ioned, but who has not, if he knows his own heart , lost anything of his early hatred of all oppression, or his early enthusiasm for the happiness and good government of all mankind.
    [Show full text]
  • British India in the Nineteenth Century
    IDEOLOGY AND LAW-MAKING: BRITISH INDIA IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY Dr. Subhasree Ghosh Independent Researcher India [email protected] I The paper aims to explore the debate surrounding the age of consummation of girls in nineteenth century colonial India and posit it in the context of the dominant colonial ideology of the time-span to analyse the degree it conformed to the same. The objective is to trace the trajectory followed in the framing of the Age of Consent Act in 1891 that legalised twelve as the legal age of consummation for married and unmarried girls. The existing historiography has taken a somewhat myopic view of a complex and a nuanced issue by glossing over the very fact that the 1891 act was not a flash in the pan but has a background history of relentless persuasion of the British administrators aided and assisted by a section of enlightened gentlemen of the native society. The other major finding of the study is that it negates the contention of Thomas R. Metcalf that the post-1857 period witnessed a perceptible shift in colonial practices in the socio-legal sphere directly impinging on the personal space of the native population.1 In the years following the tumultuous events of 1857, Metcalf states that the British “…carefully dissociated themselves from comprehensive schemes of social reform…Indian religious belief, and the social customs bound up with it, were to be left strictly alone.”2 Denis Judd corroborates Metcalf, “Fearful to set in motion an Indian reaction similar to the one that had precipitated the great uprising of 1857, the Government avoided drastic political and social change.”3 However, if one traces the journey of the debate from 1837, when the draft Indian Penal Code was submitted, to 1891, the year in which the Age of Consent Act finally came to fruition, one could trace the unmistakable thread of continuity being woven into the pattern of British administration so far as forays into the personal domain is concerned.
    [Show full text]
  • Sir John A. Macdonald Canada’S First Prime Minister
    1 Sir John A. Macdonald Canada’s first prime minister Quick Facts Term(s) of Office: July 1, 1867–November 5, 1873 October 17, 1878–June 6, 1891 Born January 11, 1815, Glasgow, Scotland Immigrated to Kingston, Upper Canada (Ontario) in 1820 Died June 6, 1891, Ottawa, Ontario, while still in office Grave site: Cataraqui Cemetery, near Kingston, Ontario Education Midland District Grammar School and John Cruickshank School, Kingston, Ontario Personal Life Married 1843, Isabella Clark (1811–1856) Two sons (one died in infancy) Re-married 1867, Susan Agnes Bernard (1836–1920) One daughter Occupations Lawyer (called to the bar of Upper Canada in 1836) 1837 Private, the Commercial Bank Guard 1843–1846 Alderman for Kingston, Ontario Political Party Liberal-Conservative (forerunner of Conservative party) 1867–1891 Party Leader Constituencies 1867–1878, 1887–1891 Kingston, Ontario 1878–1882 Victoria, British Columbia 1882–1887 Carleton, Ontario Other Ministries 1847–1848 Receiver General (Province of Canada) 1854–1858, 1858–1862, 1864–1867 Attorney General (Canada West) 1861–1862, 1865–1867 Militia Affairs 1867–1873 Justice and Attorney General 1878–1883 Interior 1878–1887 Superintendant General of Indian Affairs 1889–1891 Railways and Canals 2 Political Record Joint Premier, Province of Canada, with Étienne-Paschal Taché 1856–1857, and with George-Étienne Cartier 1857–1858, 1858–1862 Co-leader, Great Coalition, with George-Étienne Cartier and George Brown 1864–1865 and with George-Étienne Cartier 1865–1867 Father of Confederation 1867 Creation of provinces of Manitoba 1870, British Columbia 1871, and Prince Edward Island 1873 Red River Rebellion 1870 Building of Canadian Pacific Railway 1871–1885 North West Mounted Police 1873 Pacific Scandal 1873 Leader of the Opposition 1873–1878 National Policy 1879 Northwest Rebellion 1885 Creation of the first national park at Banff, Alberta 1885 Biography When fortune empties her chamber pot on your head, smile —and say “we are going to have a summer shower.”—Sir John A.
    [Show full text]
  • 225 Watertight Compartments: Getting Back to the Constitutional Division of Powers I. Introduction
    GETTING BACK TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DIVISION OF POWERS 225 WATERTIGHT COMPARTMENTS: GETTING BACK TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DIVISION OF POWERS ASHER HONICKMAN* This article offers a fresh examination of the constitutional division of powers. The author argues that sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 establish exclusive jurisdictional spheres — what the Privy Council once termed “watertight compartments.” This mutual exclusivity is emphasized and reinforced throughout these sections and leaves very little room for legitimate overlap. While some degree of overlap is permissible under this scheme — particularly incidental effects, genuine double aspects, and limited ancillary powers — overlap must be constrained in a principled fashion to comply with the exclusivity principle. The modern trend toward flexibility and freer overlap is contrary to the constitutional text. The author argues that while some deviation from the text is inevitable due to the presumption of constitutionality and stare decisis, the Supreme Court should return to a more exclusivist footing in accordance with the text. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................. 226 II. THE EXCLUSIVITY PRINCIPLE .................................. 227 A. FROM QUEBEC TO THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT ................. 227 B. THE NON OBSTANTE CLAUSE AND THE DEEMING PROVISION ...... 231 C. CONCURRENT POWERS ................................... 234 III. PITH AND SUBSTANCE AND LEGITIMATE OVERLAP ................. 235 A. INTERJURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITY .........................
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 102/Friday, May 29, 2009/Rules
    25618 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 102 / Friday, May 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND a joint final rule, effective on June 1, specific factors, such as the State’s or SECURITY 2009, that implements the Western province’s funding, technology, and Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) at other developments and U.S. Customs and Border Protection U.S. land and sea ports of entry. See 73 implementation factors. Acceptable EDL FR 18384 (the land and sea final rule). documents must have compatible 8 CFR Part 235 The land and sea final rule specifies the technology and security criteria, and [CBP Dec. 09–18] documents that U.S. citizens and must respond to CBP’s operational nonimmigrant aliens from Canada, concerns. The EDL must include Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative: Bermuda, and Mexico will be required technologies that facilitate inspection at Designation of Enhanced Driver’s to present when entering the United ports of entry. EDL documents also must Licenses and Identity Documents States at land and sea ports of entry be issued via a secure process and Issued by the States of Vermont and from within the Western Hemisphere include technology that facilitates travel Michigan and the Provinces of Quebec, (which includes contiguous territories to satisfy WHTI requirements. Manitoba, British Columbia, and and adjacent islands of the United On an ongoing basis, DHS will Ontario as Acceptable Documents To States). announce, by publication of a notice in Denote Identity and Citizenship Under the land and sea final rule, one the Federal Register, that a State’s and/ type of citizenship and identity or province’s EDL has been designated AGENCY: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Judicial Process and Canadian Legislative Powers
    Washington University Law Review Volume 25 Issue 2 January 1940 The Judicial Process and Canadian Legislative Powers W. P. M. Kennedy University of Toronto Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation W. P. M. Kennedy, The Judicial Process and Canadian Legislative Powers, 25 WASH. U. L. Q. 215 (1940). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol25/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 19401 CANADIAN LEGISLATIVE POWERS THE JUDICIAL PROCESS AND CANADIAN LEGISLATIVE POWERS W. P. M. KENNEDYt In accepting the honour of writing an article for the WASH- INGTON UNIVERSITY LAW QUARTERLY on some aspect of Canadian constitutional law, I must presume a good deal of knowledge on the part of my readers; otherwise, it would be hard to know where to begin, where to end, what to say, what to omit. For my immediate purposes it will be sufficient to remember that Canada is a federation of nine provinces created by the British North America Act, 1867,1 carrying on its activities in public and private law under that Act and its amendments, under the common law (except in Quebec, where the civil law holds sway), and under the great landmarks of British constitutional law in so far as not modified or changed by validly enacted federal or provincial legislation.
    [Show full text]